[math-fun] DNA for computer storage?
FYI -- "215 petabytes per gram of DNA" [This just in: NSA puts gigantic Bluffdale facility back onto the real estate market.] (paywalled) http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6328/950 DNA Fountain enables a robust and efficient storage architecture Yaniv Erlich, Dina Zielinski1 Science 03 Mar 2017: Vol. 355, Issue 6328, pp. 950-954 DOI: 10.1126/science.aaj2038 A reliable and efficient DNA storage architecture DNA has the potential to provide large-capacity information storage. However, current methods have only been able to use a fraction of the theoretical maximum. Erlich and Zielinski present a method, DNA Fountain, which approaches the theoretical maximum for information stored per nucleotide. They demonstrated efficient encoding of informationÂincluding a full computer operating systemÂinto DNA that could be retrieved at scale after multiple rounds of polymerase chain reaction. Abstract DNA is an attractive medium to store digital information. Here we report a storage strategy, called DNA Fountain, that is highly robust and approaches the information capacity per nucleotide. Using our approach, we stored a full computer operating system, movie, and other files with a total of 2.14 Ã 106 bytes in DNA oligonucleotides and perfectly retrieved the information from a sequencing coverage equivalent to a single tile of Illumina sequencing. We also tested a process that can allow 2.18 Ã 1015 retrievals using the original DNA sample and were able to perfectly decode the data. Finally, we explored the limit of our architecture in terms of bytes per molecule and obtained a perfect retrieval from a density of 215 petabytes per gram of DNA, orders of magnitude higher than previous reports.
The hype surrounding this, like the “dna computing” hype is so large as to be palpable. No one can make DNA at the petabase scale in a controlled way, and there are not even good ideas on how to go about it in principle. DNA can be copied relatively easily, but construction of new sequence is very hard, slow, costly, and error-prone. Reading is also slow and costly. It is true that DNA is probably a very good way to store information for a long time, especially if encoded in a living system, where accurate replication and correction of errors is automated.
On Mar 3, 2017, at 11:53 AM, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
FYI --
"215 petabytes per gram of DNA"
[This just in: NSA puts gigantic Bluffdale facility back onto the real estate market.]
(paywalled)
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6328/950
DNA Fountain enables a robust and efficient storage architecture
Yaniv Erlich, Dina Zielinski1
Science 03 Mar 2017: Vol. 355, Issue 6328, pp. 950-954 DOI: 10.1126/science.aaj2038
A reliable and efficient DNA storage architecture
DNA has the potential to provide large-capacity information storage. However, current methods have only been able to use a fraction of the theoretical maximum. Erlich and Zielinski present a method, DNA Fountain, which approaches the theoretical maximum for information stored per nucleotide. They demonstrated efficient encoding of informationincluding a full computer operating systeminto DNA that could be retrieved at scale after multiple rounds of polymerase chain reaction.
Abstract
DNA is an attractive medium to store digital information. Here we report a storage strategy, called DNA Fountain, that is highly robust and approaches the information capacity per nucleotide. Using our approach, we stored a full computer operating system, movie, and other files with a total of 2.14 × 106 bytes in DNA oligonucleotides and perfectly retrieved the information from a sequencing coverage equivalent to a single tile of Illumina sequencing. We also tested a process that can allow 2.18 × 1015 retrievals using the original DNA sample and were able to perfectly decode the data. Finally, we explored the limit of our architecture in terms of bytes per molecule and obtained a perfect retrieval from a density of 215 petabytes per gram of DNA, orders of magnitude higher than previous reports.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
To really double down on the hype, someone (TK? me?) should write an article on storing blockchains in DNA. Since replication is so cheap, you can have a huuuge number of auditors... Use CRISPR to detect&destroy malformed blockchains. [There *are* some analogies between blockchains & DNA: blockchain construction is relatively energetically cheap in terms of kT's per bit, just as DNA replication is relatively cheap in terms of kT's per bit; the expense comes in when fending off alternative futures, which cost at least 10x kT's for DNA, and considerably more for blockchains.] BTW, how long before implantable Google/Snapchat glasses which store video in DNA storage? At 09:12 AM 3/3/2017, Tom Knight wrote:
The hype surrounding this, like the "dna computing" hype is so large as to be palpable.
No one can make DNA at the petabase scale in a controlled way, and there are not even good ideas on how to go about it in principle.
DNA can be copied relatively easily, but construction of new sequence is very hard, slow, costly, and error-prone.
Reading is also slow and costly.
It is true that DNA is probably a very good way to store information for a long time, especially if encoded in a living system, where accurate replication and correction of errors is automated.
participants (2)
-
Henry Baker -
Tom Knight